Hansard
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 882
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-16 12:05 [p.5751]
Madam Speaker, I think it is important for us to recognize that we are, in fact, in a minority Parliament. No one knows what that means in terms of what can happen. The Chief Electoral Officer says we need to be ready if an election happens and Elections Canada, which is recognized around the world as an authority on independent elections, I am sure will ensure that Canada will be ready.
With respect to Bill C-19, we will continue to move forward in the best way we can.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-16 12:27 [p.5754]
Madam Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-16 12:42 [p.5756]
Mr. Speaker, my question is in regard to the importance of the national government working with provincial and territorial governments and other stakeholders to further the cause. As we talk about the legislation for net-zero emissions, I think it is very robust and ambitious, and it will meet the needs and expectations that Canadians have of the government.
Would the member not agree that, if Ottawa is working in co-operation with other jurisdictions in different areas, we will be better able to achieve the types of goals Canadians want us to achieve?
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-16 13:25 [p.5763]
Madam Speaker, I think that the government over the last six years has clearly demonstrated its ability to appreciate the value of our environment and the importance of our natural resources, recognizing that we need to take into consideration the environment, the economy, indigenous issues and other issues that surround it. Our policy has been very successful.
Maybe my colleague could elaborate on why it is that the Conservatives have not been able to land on anything successfully that deals with a very important aspect, the environment, and doing what is right for the environment. This is something that Canadians want them to do. Why have they not been successful—
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-16 13:51 [p.5767]
Madam Speaker, it is safe to say that parliamentarians reflect their constituents' beliefs. I think that we would find consensus that hideous crimes are being perpetrated in society far too often. Sexual offences, in particular against children and persons with disabilities, are indeed hideous crimes. They cause so much damage to our society.
An occurrence can take place over hours. Often, more than the hours of the actual incident, the effects could be prolonged for days and in incidents of captivity they could be much longer than that. People seem to forget that the consequences of being a victim of such a crime go far beyond the time of the incident: they stay with the person for the rest of their lives.
It is important that we as legislators understand and appreciate the impact these types of crimes have on victims, their family members and friends. Having that appreciation and understanding puts us in a better position to take action.
I used to serve on a justice committee. I want to bring two perspectives from that. It was a youth justice committee, and I was its chair for a number of years. We had this discussion about minimum sentencing, or minimum dispositions, as there was an increase of people who were stealing cars. People on the committee said that no matter who the person was who stole a car, we needed to ensure that youth had a minimum sentence or an assessment where he or she, most often he, would have to fulfill x, y, and z requirement plus whatever else they would have to assign. Other members of the committee had a different approach, saying that we needed to allow the honorary probation officers dealing with youth some discretion.
As a justice committee, we never dealt with sexual offences, but the principle of judicial discretion was something on which we had a very healthy discussion. When the committee first formed, some individuals with the hardest attitudes toward ensuring there were the toughest consequences came to believe that minimum sentences were not what we should be putting into place.
I say this because I believe that, if we were to canvass our constituents, everyone would agree that sexual offences, in particular against children and persons with disabilities, upset people significantly. We have a difficult time understanding why an offender would do such a thing and the initial reaction is to put them in jail and throw away the key. We, as legislators, understand and appreciate that is not necessarily the answer.
Yes, there needs to be a consequence, an element of punishment, but we also need to look at the bigger picture. That is not to say, as the introducer of the motion has put on the record, that former Liberal ministers have come forward and said yes to minimum sentences for certain types of crimes, this being one of them, nor does it mean we have to outright oppose all minimum sentencing; what it does mean is that we need to give special consideration to the types of things that are happening in our communities.
Whatever members think of minimum sentencing, as my New Democratic friend pointed out, they should think of judicial independence and the laws we have in place today. The Criminal Code covers most of everything, if not everything. I have not gone through the details of the private member's bill that has been provided, but it seems to cover, in one fashion or another, what we are having to face today. We might find the odd example that would challenge it to a certain degree, but I think we have to be very careful not to recognize the importance of judicial discretion. That is part of the fear I have. When we talk about systemic racism and look at incarceration and the role it has played, at least in part, it would be irresponsible for us as legislators, any time we talk about minimum sentencing, to not take into consideration the impact it may have on other issues where there could be a correlation. I find some crimes more upsetting than others.
From a personal point of view, the issue of exploitation is something I do not think we could ever do enough about with respect to discussions, debates and looking at ways we can combat it. I do not believe it has been getting better over the last number of years or back over the last decades. In part, that is because of the amount of exploitation taking place on the Internet today. I applaud the ministers of the government who I know have been doing a tremendous amount of consulting on this issue. We have a Prime Minister with a teaching background, who understands the importance of young people and making sure they get the best chances at life. When we start talking about sexual exploitation and those who are vulnerable in our society, we need to be there so we can provide that extra level of protection. There are things we can do. I believe the Government of Canada has been very proactive on that file.
I am hopeful we will see a downturn. Some of what we hear as a direct result of the pandemic on the issue of sexual exploitation is making a lot of people nervous, because we know the cost of one offence is horrendous, not to mention the impact it has on the victim. The costs go far beyond the dollar value. The bill talks about how we want—
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-15 10:22 [p.5646]
Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-15 10:36 [p.5647]
Mr. Speaker, I want the minister to pick up on the idea of the importance of UNDRIP. This is an issue that has been before the House, in one form or another, for quite a while now. When we speak about reconciliation, we talk about issues, such as reforming justice legislation and doing what we can in dealing with systemic racism. UNDRIP also plays an important aspect in reconciliation.
Can he take a broader approach in terms of why it is so important that we pass Bill C-15?
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-15 12:03 [p.5654]
Mr. Speaker, I would like members of the House to think in terms of reconciliation. I want to emphasize that Bill C-15 is about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. UNDRIP is an international call for action that was adopted by the United Nations back in 2007.
I will quote from one of our Canada websites, dated November 12, 2010. It states:
Canada joins other countries in supporting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. In doing so, Canada reaffirms its commitment to promoting and protecting the rights of Indigenous peoples at home and abroad.
I believe that all members of the House of Commons recognize the importance of reconciliation. Would the member provide her thoughts in regard to the timing and how critically important it is, after years of certain types of delays, which I will not go into, for the House of Commons pass the legislation?
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-15 13:11 [p.5664]
Madam Speaker, could the member provide further comment on the issue of reconciliation and how important that has been for the government over the last number of years? As the member pointed out, Bill C-15 is another piece of legislation that responds to the calls for action, and to a deep desire that I and many MPs have to see UNDRIP take effect. How important is it toward reconciliation from his perspective?
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-15 13:24 [p.5666]
Madam Speaker, it is important that we be really clear. The Conservative members say what they will during the debate, but their actual intentions would be not to allow the legislation to ultimately come to a vote. We have seen that on other types of legislation. Even though they might talk nice in regard to reconciliation and so forth, their actions on this particular piece of legislation, as it was with Bill C-262, say more than their words do.
I am wondering if the member could provide a very clear indication as to why the Conservatives would not have recognized the value of allowing this to come to a vote so at the very least it could go to committee.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-15 15:56 [p.5691]
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question from my good friend.
This afternoon, we will complete second reading debate of Bill C-15, an act respecting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Tomorrow morning we will start with the debate of Bill C-6, an act to amend the Criminal Code (conversion therapy), followed by the debate at second reading of Bill C-12, an act respecting transparency and accountability in Canada's efforts to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2050 in the afternoon.
On Monday of next week, we hope to complete second reading debate of Bill C-11, an act to enact the Consumer Privacy Protection Act and the Personal Information and Data Protection Tribunal Act and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts. As all members are aware, at 4:00 p.m. that day, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance will present the budget. Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday will all be days reserved for budget debate.
Finally, on Friday, we will continue with second reading debate of Bill C-21, an act to amend certain Acts and to make certain consequential amendments (firearms).
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-15 19:14 [p.5720]
Madam Speaker, I would like to be a part of the consensus I am seeing inside the chamber. Some of my New Democrat, Bloc and Conservative colleagues are saying that my friend and colleague for Cambridge has done a great service to this chamber by bringing forward such progressive legislation as a private member's bill. When I think of members being able to contribute to broader society, the member has hit it right on. I applaud him on the initiative.
I am not 100% sure where he came up with the idea, or the people he worked with, but I suspect, knowing the member for Cambridge, that this is something that is exceptionally well-thought-out, as he would have consulted and worked with a number of people on a great idea. I am really hopeful it will get to the committee stage. Having one of our standing committees, at the very least, deal with it would do a great service to Canadians. I believe we could even go beyond that, but for now I would be very happy to see it go to the committee stage.
As has been pointed out, the right to repair has been a bit of a public issue in different forums that go beyond our national borders. We have seen other jurisdictions attempt to deal with it. Over the last decade, this is the first time I am really seeing this debate be brought to the floor. As we have seen other jurisdictions attempt to deal with it, I think it is appropriate that we also deal with it.
We have to take a holistic approach to dealing with copyright. The framework's size is significant, and we have to appreciate that. I think this debate and the discussions we could see at committee would go a long way to improving the overall framework. I know a couple of our ministers have been doing consulting on the issue. What we are seeing today would add value to the consultations those ministers and the government have been looking at.
When I think of copyright, three areas come to mind. I have a personal favourite, as I suspect many members of the House might have, which is consumers. We need to think of our consumers. That is my number one priority.
Protecting the rights of creators is my second priority. It is something we have to be aware of when having any discussions in the House. The third point is that it is important, as a government, that we understand and appreciate innovation and create an environment that promotes and encourages it. I liked that the member for Cambridge addressed all three of those points in his comments, if not directly then indirectly. In doing so, he alleviated many of the concerns that people might have. The prohibition against circumventing copyrights and technology protection measures, or TPMs, makes me a little nervous, I must say. I may be dating myself.
I was born in the early sixties, in 1962 to be more precise, and I can remember my first car, which I think was a 1968 Rambler. I first started to play around with it as a very young person, when I took an interest in automobiles. Computers were not even imagined then, and when I would pop the hood of my vehicle, there was no technology. There were pistons, piston rings and spark plugs, and when I would put some gas in it, there was a bit of an expulsion of gas and the car somehow ran.
Over the years, there were thousands of people like me who took an interest in cars and had a passion for them. We understood that if something broke it was no problem. We could go to Canadian Tire, pick up the part and fix it ourselves. I spend a lot of time on computers nowadays, as I know all of us do, but as much as I love them and appreciate the technology, I can honestly say that to a certain degree I miss the days when I could pop the hood of my Mustang and play around with it, fix it up and get that sense of pride from getting something done.
Computer technology has really changed that. Innovations have changed that. For the most part, this has been for good. We see, for example, more efficient vehicles. Vehicles are healthier for our environment because of some of the technological gains we put into place. Here is a sad story: I remember the days where I could get a drill, put it in reverse and backpedal the speedometer. We cannot do that nowadays because of technology.
There is good there, and I applaud the creative minds that advanced us. I do not want to take away from the innovation that Canadians are so good at. However, having said that, we understand and appreciate that at times we see what some might call corporate greed. There are unpleasant ways of describing people who find ways to prevent local consumers from doing what they believe they should be able to do, and in all fairness, we should allow them to do it.
When I think of the legislation by my colleague from Cambridge, I see an attempt to find a fair balance, respecting what I believe are the three fundamentals: our consumers, our creators and, at the same time, continuing to encourage innovation.
Over the years, one thing I have seen within our government is that there has been, as there will continue to be, very strong representation for protecting consumers. We also see that in part from other members speaking on behalf of other political entities in the House. I can make reference to the framework of the marketplace, recognizing that we have a culture or economy that respects protection. In other words, if we go to people with a copyright law to protect a creator, whether it is for an artistic musical disk or a software program, Canadians as a whole understand why we do that. It is important that we have a public education component so that people understand the benefits of copyright. It is really important.
As we look to modernize our copyright—
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-14 16:09 [p.5573]
Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-14 16:23 [p.5575]
Madam Speaker, I want to address the member's comments toward the beginning of his speech. The Conservatives have an attitude of wanting to spread misinformation in regard to vaccines. I think it is deplorable, quite frankly, as it comes right from their leadership all the way down. I would ask the member to give his comments.
Let us go to the raw numbers. We know, for example, that Canada will have approximately 44 million doses of vaccines before the end of June. Can the member provide the House with any other country that will have more vaccine doses on a per capita basis than Canada?
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
2021-04-13 10:30 [p.5475]
Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand at this time.
Results: 1 - 15 of 882 | Page: 1 of 59

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data